Opinion
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A073-419-221.
For LUISITO FORMALEJO MAGLAQUE, Petitioner: Berc Agopoglu, Esquire, Attorney, Law Offices of Berc & Associates, Los Angeles, CA.
For ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent: OIL, Karen Y. Stewart, Esquire, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC; Chief Counsel ICE, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA.
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Luisito Formalejo Maglaque, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (" BIA" ) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's denial of his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. In his opening brief, Maglaque does not address, and therefore has waived any challenge to, the BIA's dispositive determination that he failed to demonstrate prejudice from former counsel's alleged ineffective assistance. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n. 3 (9th Cir. 2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA's decision not to exercise its sua sponte authority to reopen the proceedings. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
Petitioner's remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.